If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Lets put things in perspective When everythings done and dusted jimmy never will be a great but neither will he be counted as poor or avge He ll be seen as somewhere in the middle - a very good test bowler

I'd say it should be 30. He was an average 35 trundler for 5 years, then an average 25 good bowler for 5 years. He deserves 30.

If he bowls well the rest of his career he might end up averaging 28. About the same as Craig McDermott, both good servants for their country and quality bowlers, part of some important teams/wins but nothing special in the big scheme of things as bowlers.

Anyone who knows their cricket knows that Anderson is a quality bowler who contributes to many good things for his team. I don't see much point in discussing this further when the topic has already been done to death by chippy armchair crusaders.

Anderson is a brilliant bowler, his overall stats don't do justice to his capability as a bowler at this stage in his career (struggled in his initial phase in international cricket), but you just need to look at his stats for the last few years to see him for the brilliant bowler he really is and always will be for engaaalaaand enggaaaland engaaaaland

Morkel averages 29 strike rate 55.
And people think he is overrated. So i dont know how a guy averaging more than that with a higher strike rate gets all the media attention and hype

As you can spot the sentiment around you, there are many who think Anderson's overrated too.

Both are the nearly there men of international fast bowling today. It's just the fact that we perceive Morkel as the clear second or third best in his line-up, thanks to the domineering presence of the bloke they call Dale.

As you can spot the sentiment around you, there are many who think Anderson's overrated too.

Both are the nearly there men of international fast bowling today. It's just the fact that we perceive Morkel as the clear second or third best in his line-up, thanks to the domineering presence of the bloke they call Dale.

its just that those who rate Jimmy are claiming he is a legend and an ll time great of the game. As you can see the hype is not equivalent now is it?

its just that those who rate Jimmy are claiming he is a legend and an ll time great of the game. As you can see the hype is not equivalent now is it?

You can attribute that to the excitable English media. For the first time in a long time, they finally have a decent team, so expect their papers, commentators, ex-players and the like to continually blow the trumpet.

To all the people bashing Anderson, it's only malakian and kpfan going to these extremes to call him great.

If he manages to dip his average below 30, he'll have clawed it back from an average worthy of Ishant to respectability, over a long career. He would end up the best English bowler for the past two decades (ahead of Harmison, Gough, Caddick, Hoggard) simply due to his production and his ability to still keep playing. And if he crosses Botham, he still wont be as good as the three currently ahead of him in the 300 club, but he'll be an England great.

In the international scene he will end up being remembered as a solid, good bowler, one of many who made it to 300, and ended up with under 30. And that's fine, England have not had many bowlers that have made it to even that list, and we'll be happy with that. Solid, quality bowler, and he'd make a currently playing World XI, we can hardly ask for more than that.

You can attribute that to the excitable English media. For the first time in a long time, they finally have a decent team, so expect their papers, commentators, ex-players and the like to continually blow the trumpet.

And the English media heralds him as a future England great. Are they not right in being able to rank their own players as a future great for England alone? All those news articles have focused solely on him making the English 300-club, they've even pointed out that many before him have made it to the World's 300-club.

To all the people bashing Anderson, it's only malakian and kpfan going to these extremes to call him great.

If he manages to dip his average below 30, he'll have clawed it back from an average worthy of Ishant to respectability, over a long career. He would end up the best English bowler for the past two decades (ahead of Harmison, Gough, Caddick, Hoggard) simply due to his production and his ability to still keep playing. And if he crosses Botham, he still wont be as good as the three currently ahead of him in the 300 club, but he'll be an England great.

In the international scene he will end up being remembered as a solid, good bowler, one of many who made it to 300, and ended up with under 30. And that's fine, England have not had many bowlers that have made it to even that list, and we'll be happy with that. Solid, quality bowler, and he'd make a currently playing World XI, we can hardly ask for more than that.

To all the people bashing Anderson, it's only malakian and kpfan going to these extremes to call him great.

If he manages to dip his average below 30, he'll have clawed it back from an average worthy of Ishant to respectability, over a long career. He would end up the best English bowler for the past two decades (ahead of Harmison, Gough, Caddick, Hoggard) simply due to his production and his ability to still keep playing. And if he crosses Botham, he still wont be as good as the three currently ahead of him in the 300 club, but he'll be an England great.

Good post.

In the early days of his England career Jimmy was over-coached. He got a lot of conflicting advice and they tried to remodel his action. Had they left him be, he'd have passed Botham by now averaging about 27.

Anyway he is now on 305, right behind Trueman and should past the illustrious Yorkie in NZ's next innings.

In the early days of his England career Jimmy was over-coached. He got a lot of conflicting advice and they tried to remodel his action. Had they left him be, he'd have passed Botham by now averaging about 27.

Anyway he is now on 305, right behind Trueman and should past the illustrious Yorkie in NZ's next innings.

I think Gough was better over his career than Anderson. But if it comes down to a difference of average by 1-2 and ~170 odd wickets or more... you would have to give it to Jimmy for production and longevity. I have him ahead of Hoggy and Harmison on both criteria. Probably past Caddick for being the main striker. Only Tough left to surpass..

Jimmy is no Fred Trueman, but what's wrong with having a slightly weaker version of another famous Lancastrian in Statham.

Decent bowler but overrated by most...I dont rate bowlers who average 30+ despite playing 90% matches on juicy seaming English pitches...Worst of all he is the leader of English attack....I dont buy this coached improperly early on or stats dont do justice to his class rubbish theory....His stats showed exactly what he is all about....Above average bowler who disappoints against good sides and destroy minnows to maintain his sub 30 average.....

I think Gough was better over his career than Anderson. But if it comes down to a difference of average by 1-2 and ~170 odd wickets or more... you would have to give it to Jimmy for production and longevity. I have him ahead of Hoggy and Harmison on both criteria. Probably past Caddick for being the main striker. Only Tough left to surpass..

Jimmy is no Fred Trueman, but what's wrong with having a slightly weaker version of another famous Lancastrian in Statham.

I concur with your pecking order. Caddick had most capacity to bulldoze a hole in the opposition but he could be easily put off by the Aussies.

What we really need is a reliable full-on strike bowler. I think Finn can develop that way. He's still really young and is already closing on 100 test wickets, striking every 48 balls. If he keeps this up he'll pass Botham, Jimmy, everyone.

I concur with your pecking order. Caddick had most capacity to bulldoze a hole in the opposition but he could be easily put off by the Aussies.

What we really need is a reliable full-on strike bowler. I think Finn can develop that way. He's still really young and is already closing on 100 test wickets, striking every 48 balls. If he keeps this up he'll pass Botham, Jimmy, everyone.

Finn needs a lot of work. He swans in and takes easy tailender wickets and I think his most removed wickets are Bangladesh players. He needs to step up and make incisions to top orders before I put any faith in him. Lets not forget than Mitchell Johnson got off to a flier in his career with the exact same MO. Wickettaking with less than good bowling and a high econ. His average is climbing after his prodigious start, he has so much work to do. But he has time. I personally would recall Bresnan for his early season form. Finn still needs to learn his craft in County.

Finn needs a lot of work. He swans in and takes easy tailender wickets and I think his most removed wickets are Bangladesh players.

Well, we need someone to knock the tail over quickly! I recall that he also did well against Pakistan here (they had very weak batting of course). I believe that if he stays fit we will have a English Garner in a few years.

Decent bowler but overrated by most...I dont rate bowlers who average 30+ despite playing 90% matches on juicy seaming English pitches...Worst of all he is the leader of English attack....I dont buy this coached improperly early on or stats dont do justice to his class rubbish theory....His stats showed exactly what he is all about....Above average bowler who disappoints against good sides and destroy minnows to maintain his sub 30 average.....

++
If his master Asif hadn't taught him how to swing, he would have even higher avg.

In the early days of his England career Jimmy was over-coached. He got a lot of conflicting advice and they tried to remodel his action. Had they left him be, he'd have passed Botham by now averaging about 27.

Anyway he is now on 305, right behind Trueman and should past the illustrious Yorkie in NZ's next innings.

He's definitely one of the most potent swing bowlers and given the lack of quality pace bowlers at the moment (lets face it, how many real gems are there beyond Steyn, Philander, Junaid, and maybe Starc)...hes certainly part of the 'top' brigade atm...but thats where it stops...no 'legend' averaged 30 and was, for the most part of his career, ineffective outside home, he's obviously done extremely well to improve on his limitations however.

There are only two extremes regarding Anderson- one says he is a great bowler (Poms) and the other says he is mediocre... Both are rubbish, Anderson will never be a great bowler with that 30 average... but he has been one of the top bowlers around for last couple of years and deserves credit.

He's one of the best pacers today and will end up as an English great, might even end up as England's greatest pacer. However, that is only down to the fact that cricket is really thin on quality pacers at the moment and the ones that are good, are not as established as Jimmy.

He's one of the best pacers today and will end up as an English great, might even end up as England's greatest pacer. However, that is only down to the fact that cricket is really thin on quality pacers at the moment and the ones that are good, are not as established as Jimmy.

Not a chance in hell, unless it's only measured by the number of wickets due to having played way more games than the players of past.

Not a chance in hell, unless it's only measured by the number of wickets due to having played way more games than the players of past.

I agree, Botham/Trueman/Willis were so much better.

Though if he makes 450 at 26, I wouldn't mind, but that's far far far far too much of a longshot. He might make 450 at 28 if he plays for 4-5 more years, and that's not too bad, and he'd be an English great, but not THE English great.

20 and 25 can't be grouped together, that's like Marshall and Gillespie.... when the gap is getting closer and average is towards 20, there is a pretty big difference. Only 2/3 points seperate ATGs like Mcgrath/ Imran from bowlers who are clearly not in the same league.

lol is this the indian scale. rest of the worl anything above 32 is poor

Not true.

Abdul Qadir (avg 32.80) & Mushtaq Ahmed (avg 32.97) are very respected spinners. I don't think world calls them poor or close to pathetic as some one above suggested.

Great fast bowlers will usually average lot lower than great spinners. For a fast bowler, an average of 32-33 is poor but for a spinner it's not that bad. Same scale for fast bowlers and spinners don't do justice.

Last edited by Buffet; 20th May 2013 at 20:06.

"If this happens I will swim across the Charles River! In winter!" -- OZGOD on NZ batting 6 sessions

lol is this the indian scale. rest of the worl anything above 32 is poor

I am considering the ridiculous pitches provided to bowlers time to time. A spinner, who is given absolute road will bowl a lot of overs and will easily go beyond 80 runs for just two wickets or so. That will ruin the average of a bowler massively.

20 and 25 can't be grouped together, that's like Marshall and Gillespie.... when the gap is getting closer and average is towards 20, there is a pretty big difference. Only 2/3 points seperate ATGs like Mcgrath/ Imran from bowlers who are clearly not in the same league.

They both can be an excellent bowler but can still considered different in terms of skills. I think having average under 25 in itself is a massive achievement esp. if you have taken more than 250 wickets! or played more than 80 tests.

With another test match against NZ and 10 against Aus coming up over the next year. How many wickets do you think he will take. I think he will take around 50 in the 6 Test in England. And another 40 in Aus. So he should be close to 400 wicket and ahead of Botham. If he does not get injured and plays in all the matches of course.

"Too often we... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought"-JFK

With another test match against NZ and 10 against Aus coming up over the next year. How many wickets do you think he will take. I think he will take around 50 in the 6 Test in England. And another 40 in Aus. So he should be close to 400 wicket and ahead of Botham. If he does not get injured and plays in all the matches of course.

Are you kidding me?

What?

You must be trolling. Yes, I get that Aus are bad right now, but to average over 8 wickets per match over 11 matches is insane.

With another test match against NZ and 10 against Aus coming up over the next year. How many wickets do you think he will take. I think he will take around 50 in the 6 Test in England. And another 40 in Aus. So he should be close to 400 wicket and ahead of Botham. If he does not get injured and plays in all the matches of course.

Jimmy never gets injured, he's a real man who can bowl lots of overs, unlike the soft Aussies.